JUDGMENT : Shri Toufiq Warsi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.S. Gandhi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri M.M. Bohra, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. 2. The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 5-10-2018, passed by the CEO, M.P. Waqf Board, Bhopal whereby the Managing Committee of Waqf Intezamiya Committee Hazrat Nazmuddin Shah Kalandar, Nalcha, Tehsil and District Dhar has been constituted. 3. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is a society registered under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 bearing Registration No.IND/592/91. According to the petitioner the Society was registered before the commencement of the Wakf Act, 1995 hence the M.P. Waqf board cannot appoint the committee in the society because the said property is not a waqf property but belongs to the petitioner. 4. It is further submitted that the petitioner Society has acted in the interest of the said Dargah and has been discharging its pious duties within the by-laws of the Society. The respondent No. 1 and 2 before passing the impugned order have failed to consider the fact that the said Dargah is not registered with the board as required under section 36 of the Wakf Act, 1995. No show cause notice was issued to the petitioner before appointing the management committee, therefore, the order is without jurisdiction, issued in violation of principles of natural justice is liable to be set aside. 5. After notice in the petition, the Managing Committee, Waqf Intezamiya Committee Hazrat Nazmuddin Shah Kalandar, Nalcha, Tehsil and District Dhar filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking its impleadment as respondent No. 3 in the present writ petition. By order dated 20-12-2018, the said application was allowed and the Managing Committee, Waqf Intezamiya Committee Hazrat Nazmuddin Shah Kalandar, Nalcha, Tehsil and District Dhar was impleaded as respondent No. 3. 6. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed the return by submitting that the Managing Committee was appointed vide order dated 5-10-2018 in exercise of power conferred under section 63 of the Wakf Act, 1995 for the supervision and control of Dargah of Hazrat Najmuddin Kalandar Shah, Nalcha, situated on Khasra No. 127, admeasuring 0.051 hectare at Nalcha, District Dhar. 6. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed the return by submitting that the Managing Committee was appointed vide order dated 5-10-2018 in exercise of power conferred under section 63 of the Wakf Act, 1995 for the supervision and control of Dargah of Hazrat Najmuddin Kalandar Shah, Nalcha, situated on Khasra No. 127, admeasuring 0.051 hectare at Nalcha, District Dhar. The Dargah property is a waqf property which is at Serial No. 490 in the list of Auqaf published by the State Government. As per section 4 a preliminary survey of Auqafs was undertaken by the Survey Commissioner and thereafter a report was submitted to the Board under section 5(1) and after examining the said report, a list of waqf property was published in the official gazette. Once, the notification has been issued, the property included in the list becomes the waqf property. If any question arises whether the particular property is a waqf property or not it is a subject-matter of suit which is required to be filed within the prescribed limitation before the Tribunal under section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995. The provisions of section 36 are not applicable as the disputed property is already a waqf property. The copy of the gazette notification dated 18-1-1985 has been filed as Annexure R/1. It is further submitted that the petitioner is having remedy to approach the Tribunal under section 83 before the Waqf Tribunal against the impugned order 5-10-2018, hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. The respondent No. 3 has also filed the return raising the issue of maintainability and availability of the alternate remedy by way of suit under section 83 before the Tribunal. It is submitted that the disputed question of fact are involved in the writ petition. The property in dispute is a waqf property, therefore, the Management and supervision vest with the M.P. Waqf Board at Bhopal under Wakf Act of 1995. The provisions of Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 are not applicable. The petitioner has no locus-standi to file the present petition as the petitioner is in illegal occupation of the waqf property. The petitioner is neither owner, lessee, mutawali nor mujawar, hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed with cost. 8. The provisions of Madhya Pradesh Society Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973 are not applicable. The petitioner has no locus-standi to file the present petition as the petitioner is in illegal occupation of the waqf property. The petitioner is neither owner, lessee, mutawali nor mujawar, hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed with cost. 8. Shri Toufiq Warsi, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner society was registered way back in the year 1991 before the Wakf Act, 1995 came into force. Before the Wakf Act, 1995 came into force, the Wakf Act, 1954 was occupying the field. Before declaring any property as a waqf property the preliminary survey is required to be carried out by a supervisory committee constituted by the State Government. The committee is required to submit a report after adjudicating a dispute as to a particular wakf is a Siya wakf or Sunni wakf. Thereafter, the report is liable to be forwarded to the Board. In the present case, no such survey was carried out, hence, the property cannot be treated as a wakf property. Even under the Act of 1995, there is a similar provision under section 4 and 5 for conducting the preliminary survey and publication of the list. 9. He further submitted that the registration of wakf property is provided under section 36 and for which the application is liable to be made by mutawalli. Since, the disputed property is not a wakf property; therefore, the petitioner cannot be relegated to the Tribunal under section 83 of the Wakf Act, 1995. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance over the judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of M.P. Wakf Board v. Subhan Shah, Appeal (Civil) 6975 of 2004, decided on 31-10-2006 and Board of Muslim Wakfs v. Smt. Hadi Begum, reported in 1993 Supp (1) SCC 192 : AIR 1992 SC 1083 . He further submitted that though the respondent No. 3 is appointed as Managing Committee, but a show cause notice dated 5-11-2018 has been issued by the CEO to the President of the Managing Committee for suppression of fact about the pendency of a criminal case against him. 10. He further submitted that though the respondent No. 3 is appointed as Managing Committee, but a show cause notice dated 5-11-2018 has been issued by the CEO to the President of the Managing Committee for suppression of fact about the pendency of a criminal case against him. 10. Shri M.M. Bohra and Shri B.S. Gandhi, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that vide gazette notification dated 18-1-1985, the property in question had been notified as a wakf property which the petitioner cannot question before this Court after lapse of so many years. The petitioner is having alternate remedy to approach the Tribunal under section 83 against the order of appointment of Committee. In support of his contention they placed reliance over the judgment passed by the Apex Court in case of Salam Khan v. Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Chennai, reported in AIR 2005 Madras 241 and the judgment passed by this Court in case of Anwar Khan v. M.P. Waqf Board, W.P. No. 4174/2017, Rasid Shah v. Madhya Pradesh Wakf Board, W.P. No. 3745/2017, Shakil Ahmed v. M.P. State Waqf Board, W.P. No. 21356/2017, Gani Mohhammed v. State of M.P., W.P. No. 633/2017 and Haji Abdul Aziz Ansari v. M.P. Wakf Board, Bhopal, Civil Revision No. 377/2009 and prayed for dismissal of writ petition. 11. This petition is filed only on the ground that the Wakf Board is not having jurisdiction to appoint the Managing Committee in respect of the properties of Dargah of Hazrat Najmuddin Kalandar Shah, Nalcha because it is being managed by the petitioner Society. This Court has entertained the writ petition only on the plea raised by the petitioner that the property is not wakf property but the respondent has filed the notification dated 18-1-1985 and according to which the property had been notified as a wakf property. The petitioner did not file the complete copy of the notification, whereas the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 have filed the complete notification. So far as the applicability of section 36 is concerned, it is applicable for registration of a new wakf, hence, the same will not apply in case of the petitioner. The petitioner did not file the complete copy of the notification, whereas the respondents Nos. 1 to 3 have filed the complete notification. So far as the applicability of section 36 is concerned, it is applicable for registration of a new wakf, hence, the same will not apply in case of the petitioner. The dargah property in question had already been registered under the provisions of the Wakf Act, 1954 and anything done or any action taken under the said Act shall deem to have been done or taken under the corresponding provision of Act of 1995 as per the provisions of section 112, therefore, the declaration of wakf property under the old Act is valid even after the promulgation of the Wakf Act 1995. 12. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 5-10-2018, whereby the Managing Committee has been appointed by the Wakf Board. Under section 83, the petitioner is having remedy to approach the Tribunal. The Tribunal is also having jurisdiction to determine any dispute, question or other matter relating to the Wakf property under this Act. 13. Section 83 is reproduced below: “83. Constitution of Tribunals, etc.—(1) The State Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute as many Tribunals as it may think fit, for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a wakf or wakf property under this Act and define the local limits and jurisdiction under this Act of each of such Tribunals. (2) Any mutawalli person interested in a wakf or any other person aggrieved by an order made under this Act, or rules made thereunder, may make an application within the time specified in this Act or where no such time has been specified, within such time as may be prescribed, to the Tribunal for the determination of any dispute, question or other matter relating to the wakf. (3) Where any application made under sub-section (1) relates to any wakf property which falls within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of two or more Tribunals, such application may be made to the Tribunal within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the mutawalli or any one of the mutawallis of the wakf actually and voluntarily resides, carries on business or personally works for gain, and, where any such application is made to the Tribunal aforesaid, the other Tribunal or Tribunals having jurisdiction shall not entertain any application for the determination of such dispute, question or other matter: Provided that the State Government may, if it is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest of the wakf or any other person interested in the wakf or the wakf property to transfer such application to any other Tribunal having jurisdiction for the determination of the dispute, question or other matter relating to such wakf or wakf property, transfer such application to any other Tribunal having jurisdiction, and, on such transfer, the Tribunal to which the application is so transferred shall deal with the application from the stage which was reached before the Tribunal from which the application has been so transferred, except where the Tribunal is of opinion that it is necessary in the interests of justice to deal with the application afresh. (4) Every Tribunal shall consist of one person, who shall be a member of the State Judicial Service holding a rank, not below that of a District, Sessions or Civil Judge, Class I, and the appointment of every such person may be made either by name or by designation. (5) The Tribunal shall be deemed to be a civil Court and shall have the same powers as may be exercised by a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while trying a suit, or executing a decree or order. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the Tribunal shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. (7) The decision of the Tribunal shall be final and binding upon the parties to the application and it shall have the force of a decree made by a Civil Court. (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), the Tribunal shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. (7) The decision of the Tribunal shall be final and binding upon the parties to the application and it shall have the force of a decree made by a Civil Court. (8) The execution of any decision of the Tribunal shall be made by the civil Court to which such decision is sent for execution in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908). (9) No appeal shall lie against any decision or order whether interim or otherwise, given or made by the Tribunal: Provided that a High Court may, on its own motion or on the application of the Board or any person aggrieved, call for and examine the records relating to any dispute, question or other matter which has been determined by the Tribunal for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of such determination and may confirm, reverse or modify such determination or pass such other order as it may think fit.” 14. Therefore, in view of the above, present petition is misconceived and dismissed for want of alternate remedy. Petition dismissed.